FictionThatMatters.org

Anyone who has ever invited a friend to come to the U.S. has bumped into the ruthless bureaucracy of the immigration system. The process often works something like this:

Consular officer: I regret that your visa application was denied, Mr. Jonathan.
Jonathan: Why?
Consular officer: Because I think you plan to stay in the U.S.
Jonathan But I have a wife and two kids here in Djibouti, and plenty of money.
Consular officer: The decision has been made. Next in line, please.
Jonathan: Can’t I appeal?
Consular officer: You can submit another visa application. Next, please.
Jonathan: And who will review it?
Consular officer: Little ol’ me.

Therein lies the central problem with the immigration system. Administered by Congress, consular officers enjoy almost unfettered discretion to deny applicants entry into the U.S. An officer could cite any number of reasons to deny an applicant, including broad ‘ideological exclusion’ provisions which can preclude applicants from entering the country because of their unfavorable political views. And the discretion became much broader with the enactment of the USA Patriot Act. Not only have such provisions been strengthened within the Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA), they now allow the denial of visas for applicants who have provided ‘material support’ to terrorist organizations. No one disputes that terrorists should be kept out of the country. This is good for national security. But what if the consular officer simply got it wrong? Shouldn’t there be a review of the decision? As it stands, no.

These issues were before the 2d Circuit Court of Appeals in American Academy of Religion v. Napolitano in Manhattan today. And the facts were much worse. Tariq Ramadan is a Swiss born Muslim scholar who had been offered a tenured professorship at the University of Notre Dame. Ramadan was known for his strong condemnation of terrorism, but also his criticism of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East, offering an insightful, nuanced view of foreign relations. His visa application was denied several times. First, his application was denied on the basis of ideological exclusion provisions and later, after human rights activists cried foul, for his having allegedly provided material support to a terrorist organization. His cause is being championed by the PEN American Freedom to Write Project, the American Academy of Religion, and the ACLU, among others.

Read the full review here.

Inventing Human Rights
by Lynn Hunt. Non-fiction.
Norton, 2007. 272 pages.

Lynn Hunt’s book Inventing Human Rights has an ambitious objective, to chart the birth of human rights from the eighteenth century onwards. What distinguishes this text from others – and makes it important for us – is that Hunt explores cultural trends as well. Human rights did not emerge from a political vacuum, but were accompanied by new developments in the arts. The ability of novels to induce responses in their readers may well have helped abolish torture and create human rights as we know them today.

This book explains, in fine prose, why FictionthatMatters.org exists in the first place. Books can change the way we think — and the way we act.

Read the full review here.